The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum


Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page

Go Back   The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum > The New Silmarillion > Translations from the Elvish - Public Forum
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-14-2018, 12:30 PM   #1
Findegil
King's Writer
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,417
Findegil is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
Glorfindel

This is the first draft of the chapter Glorfindel in the part The Black Years.

Basic Text is that of Glorfindel II in HoME 12.

The markings are:
BY-HL-zz for Black Years, Head-Lines, marking all headlines for the chapters in this part.

GLOR-SL-zz for GLORfindel, Story-Line, to document all changes that construct the main text.

Some conventions of my writing:
Normal Text is from the text that is mentioned in the source information of each insert.
Bold Text = source information, comments and remarks
{example} = text that should be deleted
[example] = normalised text, normally only used for general changes
<source example> = additions with source information
example = text inserted for grammatical or metrical reason
/example/ = outline expansion
Normally if an inserted text includes the beginning of a new § these is indicated by a missing “>” at the end of the § and a missing “<” at the beginning of the next.
Quote:
BY-HL-10 <Last Writings Glorfindel
>GLOR-SL-01 <Glorfindel II This name GLOR-SL-02{is in fact derived from the earliest work on the mythology: The Fall of Gondolin, composed in 1916-17, … was still haphazard. It }was intended to mean 'Golden-tressed', GLOR-SL-03{(4)} and was the name given to the heroic {'Gnome' (}Ñoldo{)}, a chieftain of Gondolin, who in the pass of {Cristhorn}[Cirith Thoronath] ('Eagle-cleft') fought with a {Balrog [> }Demon{]}, whom he slew at the cost of his own life. GLOR-SL-04{
Its use in The Lord of the Rings is one of the cases of … if Glorfindel of Gondolin is supposed to be the same person as Glorfindel of Rivendell.
As for the former: he} He was slain in the Fall of Gondolin at the end of the First Age, and if a chieftain of that city must have been a Ñoldo, one of the Elf-lords in the host of King Turukano (Turgon). GLOR-SL-05{; at any rate when The Fall of Gondolin was written he was certainly thought to be so.} But the Noldor in Beleriand were exiles from Valinor, having rebelled against the authority of Manwë supreme head of the Valar, and Turgon was one of the most determined and unrepentant supporters of Feanor's rebellion. GLOR-SL-06{(5) There is no escape from this. … The Sindar had never left Middle-earth.
This difficulty, … will actually explain what is said of him and improve the story.}
When Glorfindel of Gondolin was slain … But this 'restoration' could be delayed[Footnote to the text: Or in gravest cases (such as that of Fëanor) withheld and referred to the One.] by Manwë, if the fëa while alive had done evil deeds and refused to repent of them, or still harboured any malice against any other person among the living.
Now Glorfindel of Gondolin was one of the exiled Noldor, … From what is said of Glorfindel GLOR-SL-07{in The Silmarillion and The Lord of the Rings }it is evident that he was an Elda of high and noble spirit: … and had no part in the kinslaying of Alqualonde.[Footnote to the text: Though {he [}Glorfindel{]} is not GLOR-SL-08{ yet} named in GLOR-SL-09{the unrevised part of The Silmarillion}texts treating of this matter, it is recorded that many of the Noldor of Turgon's following were in fact grieved by the decision of their king, and dreaded that evil would soon result from it. In the Third Host, that of Finarfin, so many were of this mind that when Finarfin heard the final doom of Mandos and repented, the greater part of that host returned to Valinor. Yet Finrod son of Finarfin, noblest of all the Noldor in the tales of Beleriand, also went away, for GLOR-SL-10{Turgon}[Fingolfin] had been elected supreme lord of the Noldorin hosts. GLOR-SL-11{
[In the Annals of Aman (X.113, $138) there was no suggestion that Finrod (= Finarfin) led a separate 'Third Host': … and it is reassuring to see that in a reference else where in these papers Fingolfin reappears.]}]
More important: Glorfindel had sacrificed his life in defending the fugitives from the wreck of Gondolin against a Demon out of Thangorodrim, GLOR-SL-12{(10)} and so enabling Tuor and Idril daughter of Turgon and their child Earendil to escape, and seek refuge at the Mouths of Sirion. Though he cannot have known the importance of this (and would have defended them even had they been fugitives of any rank), this deed was of vital importance to the designs of the Valar. GLOR-SL-13{(11)} It is therefore GLOR-SL-14{entirely in keeping with the general design of The Silmarillion}possible to describe the subsequent history of Glorfindel thus. After his purging of any guilt that he had incurred in the rebellion, he was released from Mandos, and Manwë restored him.[Footnote to the text: This implies that Glorfindel was natively an Elda of great bodily and spiritual stature, a noble character, and that his guilt had been small: sc. that he owed allegiance to Turgon and loved his own kindred, and these were his only reasons for remaining with them, although he was grieved by their obstinacy, and feared the doom of Mandos.] He then became again a living incarnate person, … he became a follower, and a friend, of Olorin (Gandalf), who as is said in The Silmarillion had an especial love and concern for the Children of Eru. GLOR-SL-15{(13)} That Olorin, as was possible for one of the Maiar, had already visited Middle-earth and had become acquainted not only with the Sindarin Elves and others deeper in Middle-earth, but also with Men, is likely, but nothing is GLOR-SL-16{[> has yet been]} said of this.
Glorfindel remained in the Blessed Realm, no doubt at first by his own choice: Gondolin was destroyed, and all his kin had perished, and were still in the Halls of Waiting unapproachable by the living. But his long sojourn during the last years of the First Age, and at least far into the Second Age, no doubt was also in accord with the wishes and designs of Manwë.
When did Glorfindel return to Middle-earth? … this is improbable and would make Glorfindel of greater power and importance than seems fitting.
We may then best suppose that Glorfindel returned during the Second Age, … and attempted to deceive Gil-galad, but was rejected and dismissed.[Footnote to the text: No doubt because Gil-galad had by then discovered that Sauron was busy in Eregion, but had secretly begun the making of a stronghold in Mordor. (Maybe already an Elvish name for that region, because of its volcano Orodruin and its eruptions - which were not made by Sauron but were a relic of the devastating works of Melkor in the long First Age.) GLOR-SL-17{ [See note 15.]}] But it may have been, perhaps more probably, as late as c.1600, the Year of Dread, when Barad-dur was completed and the One Ring forged, and Celebrimbor at last became aware of the trap into which he had fallen. For in 1200, though he was filled with anxiety, Gil-galad still felt strong and able to treat Sauron with contempt. GLOR-SL-18{(15)} Also at that time his Númenorëan allies were beginning to make strong permanent havens for their great ships, … and no doubt urgent messages and prayers asking for help were received in Númenor (and in Valinor).[Footnote to the text: For the Valar were open to the hearing of the prayers of those in Middle-earth, as ever before, save only that in the dark days of the Ban they would listen to one prayer only from the Noldor: a repentant prayer pleading for pardon.]>
Some comments on my editing:

BY-HL-10: I don’t think there is much to say about the title, but we might discuss here if we want to include this at all.

GLOR-SL-01: I mark here just the start of the insert.

GLOR-SL-02, GLOR-SL-04, GLOR-SL-05, GLOR-SL-06, GLOR-SL-07, GLOR-SL-14: This is JRR Tolkien talking about his story writing and has to be removed.

GLOR-SL-03, GLOR-SL-11, GLOR-SL-14, GLOR-SL-17, GLOR-SL-18: A footnote with a comment of Christopher Tolkien removed.

GLOR-SL-08 & GLOR-SL-09: This is Tolkien speaking about his own texts changed into a neutral statement about what the text says.

GLOR-SL-10: As Christopher Tolkien in his commentary, I have no idea why here Turgon is named. But in the scope of the project this must either be considered as a slip of the pen or as a proposed change unworkable.

GLOR-SL-12: The note referred to here is from JRR Tolkien, but it reads: ‘The duel of Glorfindel and the Demon may need revision.’ Since this is a kind of reminder for farther work, we can not take it up.

GLOR-SL-13: The note referred to here is from JRR Tolkien, but it reads: ‘This is one of the main matters of The Silmarillion and need not here be explained. But in that part of The Silmarillion as so far composed it should not be left to appear that Ulmo, chiefly concerned in the coming of Tuor to Gondolin, in any way acted contrary to the Ban, against Manwe or without his knowledge.’ Since this is a kind of reminder for farther work, we can not take it up.
I as well checked the passage in FoG, and I don’t think that any change is necessary, sine Ulmo explicitly said, ‘I seem to oppose the will of my brethren, the Lords of the West’.

GLOR-SL-16: Normally we would use the newer text, but here the old one fits better, since we have to remove the commentary like character.

Respectfully
Findegil
Findegil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2018, 04:01 PM   #2
ArcusCalion
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 369
ArcusCalion has just left Hobbiton.
I have some minor comments, most of which remove any 'commentative' or 'ambiguous' wording left in after Fin's edits. I think in Fin's draft it is presented as someone making conjectures about what might have happened, which is not in keeping with the entire rest of the body of work, which is presented as an authoritative story. If it really must be kept ambiguous, then I would argue it should be moved to Volume 3, as a work of Scholarly deduction rather than historical narrative. I do not think this is necessary, and so I have instead edited it further to turn it into a historical account in keeping with all the other chapters.

GLOR-SL-04: I agree with this removal, but in the paragraph following I would make the following change:
Quote:
As for the former: he}He was slain in the Fall of Gondolin at the end of the First Age, and GLOR-SL-04.5 {if}was a chieftain of that city {must have been}and a Noldo, one of the Elf-lords in the host of King {Turukáno (}Turgon{)}.
This is because from the Fall of Gondolin as edited and according to the later texts, not all of the people were Noldor, nor indeed were all the lords. Therefore it does not follow that if Glorfindel was a lord of the city then he must be a Noldo, since that is not true.

GLOR-SL-07: I would change this thus to remove the ambiguity of the story. I moved the marker slightly earlier.
Quote:
GLOR-SL-07 {From what is said of} Glorfindel {in The Silmarillion and The Lord of the Rings it is evident that he} was an Elda of high ....
GLOR-SL-09: I agree with this change, but afterwards there is a bit calling Turgon their king. Is this correct? IS he not rather their lord, and Fingolfin their king? Or is he simply the high king, and Turgon and all the others were kings as well?

GLOR-SL-13/14: I think as Fin left it, it sounds too speculative and conjectural, and so I edited it further, combining 13 and 14 together:
Quote:
GLOR-SL-13/14 {(11) It is therefore entirely in keeping with the general design of The Silmarillion to describe the subsequent history of Glorfindel thus.} After his purging of any guilt ....
GLOR-SL-14.5: Later in this paragraph, there is a reference to Gandalf being mentioned in the Silmarillion as being a friend of the Children. This is actually in the Valaquenta, and as the two are separate works in our draft, we should change it to reflect that. So I simply changed {The Silmarillion}[The Valaquenta].

GLOR-SL-16.5: The entire second-to-last paragraph is Tolkien speculating about when Glorfindel might have returned. It has to go if we are presenting it as a historical fact and not a scholarly essay, and so I have removed it:
Quote:
GLOR-SL-16.5 {When did Glorfindel return to Middle-earth? .... importance than seems fitting.
We may then best suppose that} Glorfindel returned ...
GLOR-SL-16.7: In the next paragraph we run into several similar issues. Firstly:
Quote:
... Sauron were at last perceived by them. GLOR-SL-16.7 {It might, therefore, have been as early as Second Age 1200, when Sauron came in person to Lindon, and attempted to deceive Gil-galad, but was rejected and dismissed. [Footnote: No doubt because Gil-galad had by then discovered that Sauron was busy in Eregion, but had secretly begun the making of a stronghold in Mordor. (Maybe already an Elvish name for that region, because of its volcano Orodruin and its eruptions - which were not made by Sauron but were a relic of the devastating works of Melkor in the long First Age.) GLOR-SL-17 [See note 15.]] But it may have been, perhaps more probably, as late as} It was c.1600, the Year of Dread ....
I decided if we were to pick one of the two variants given, we must choose the one Tolkien says is more likely, which he gives as the second option, and we must therefore remove all the references to the former. However, the description of the origin of Orodruin I moved into its own footnote later on here:
Quote:
... completed and the One Ring forged GLOR-SL-16.8 in Mordor, [Footnote: {Maybe already}Already an Elvish name for that region, because of its volcano Orodruin and its eruptions - which were not made by Sauron but were a relic of the devastating works of Melkor in the long First Age.] and Celebrimbor ...
After this he gives reasons why 1200 is unlikely, which I have removed:
Quote:
... trap into which he had fallen. GLOR-SL-16.9 {For in 1200, though he was filled with anxiety, Gil-galad still felt strong and able to treat Sauron with contempt. Also at that time his Númenórean allies were beginning to make strong permanent havens for their great ships, and also many of them had actually begun to dwell there permanently.} In 1600 it became clear to all the ....
These are all my changes. I apologize for the length of the post, and also if I came across as unappreciative. This is a very difficult chapter to edit, considering the difficult nature of the text. I only give these comments because I think I must and I feel strongly about the reasoning behind them, even though I imagine Fin will disagree with them.
ArcusCalion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2018, 11:18 PM   #3
Findegil
King's Writer
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,417
Findegil is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
I m not sure if the draft ‘presented as someone making conjectures about what might have happened’ ‘is not in keeping with the entire rest of the body of work’. We have already comments and introduction telling about the textual history of what follows. So it is in my view not the case that we have only ‘an authoritative story’.
I think that this difference in the overall approach is at the moment the main point of disagreement between us. Most of the points of criticism ArcusCalion raise are connected to this. So I think we must clear that point first before discussing it again and again in each single point raised. And I think it will have an impact on later chapters as well.
For me it was clear that what we as real world editors compile as Translation from the Elvish is in itself a compilation of works from different sources, some of which are pure narratives, some narrative plus later commentary, some more descriptive, some are essay. Early in the project there was an emotional debate about revisions to smooth the ‘style’ of the writing. It sprang from the hard break in style felt between Tuor and his coming to Gondolin from UT and The Fall of Gondolin from HoMe 2, but the decision taken at that time was used ever after. In the result the revisions for reasons of style were denied for this first step of the project. Lindil, the main promoter of the stylish edits, envisioned a second phase of the project in which the once established text would be farther revised to make it more uniform and of higher literary quality, but it was consensus to separate the two steps an refrain from any pure stylish edits.
The question at hand is of course not quite the same, but it has some similarities. When we lift some paragraphs or sentences from an essay like Of Dwarves and Men into the body of some chapter of pure narrative we clearly have to adapt them to their new environment. But here we are speaking about full chapters. Okay we adapt them in a way, since we have to change them from essay by JRR Tolkien reflecting about this own creation. But is it not overdone if we change them to fact reporting narrative? I at least approached the edit differently and changed them to essay by some later Middle-earthian writer reflecting about the history of his world. That this is not alien to Tolkiens writing is shown by many examples like The Elessar or The Istari.
Often enough in the history of this project we found that ambiguity is our best friend if we can handle it. That does not mean, that we should not try to find out what ‘really’ happen in Middle-earth. And if we are able to make that out (by unanimous consent) we should try to make it as clear as our rules and the texts we are working with allow. But the team soon discovered that unanimous consent can not always be reached even by endless high sophisticated discussion. So from the start there was a need for some alternative. The simple and at the beginning of the project often used way was voting. This is a nice and fast working procedure for a large team, but is very dangerous for small teams. So the smaller the team became the more we avoided voting. The discussion for building up an unanimous consent became longer, deeper and more enlighting. But since it remains true that unanimous consent can not always be reached, in this process ambiguity became more and more important and – at least from my point of view – our work better: we strove to allow an interpretation of our text that would fit the different ‘personal Middle-earth cannon’ of each team member if we could not change that ‘personal cannon’ by profound arguments.

All that said, I am inclined to think any essay by some later scribe gives more freeness for ambiguity than a narrative text can do. And if the style of our basic text is in that way, I am against changing it without farther fording reason.

Now to some not directly connected points:
GLOR-SL-04.5: Good catch. I didn’t thought about that. I agree on the first part. But do not see any good reason to remove Turukáno here.

GLOR-SL-09: Clearly Turgon is often called ‘King of Gondolin’ even before he had could claim the title ‘Highking of the Noldor in Middle-earth’ after the death of his brother Fingon. But I think the interpretation of the text is to narrow here if ‘the decision of their king’ is read as ‘Turgons decision’ after our editing. Clearly the decision is taken by Finrafin (in agreement with Turgons wishes) and that was by what people like Glrofindel were grieved.

GLOR-SL-13/14: I couldn’t resist to gain say this particular case in special: How could any narrator of our text being inside the legendarium be sure what had happened in Mandos? He might get a report from coincil of the Valar out of Valinor by some Elve or Maia that was present, but from inside the Halls of Waiting? Or do we suppose that Glorfindel himself would openly talk about his purgatory stay in Mandos? I don’t think so, and therefore ambiguity is for sure needed here.

GLOR-SL-14.5: Agreed. Good catch.

Respectfully
Findegil
Findegil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2018, 11:30 PM   #4
ArcusCalion
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 369
ArcusCalion has just left Hobbiton.
I do see your point, but all the same, I would propose a difference. If the uncertain nature of the text and its construction as an analytical text by an in-universe author making speculative comments, would it not be more appropriate to include in Volume 3?
ArcusCalion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2018, 03:40 PM   #5
ArcusCalion
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 369
ArcusCalion has just left Hobbiton.
My main point, Fin, is that this text reads as speculative, whereas all the other chapters in the First Age, Second Age, and Third Age narrative read as given fact. As you say, this is not unusual for Tolkien, who likes to sprinkle in some uncertainty to his narratives (see Istari and Elessar). However, my main point of discussion I suppose is the placement of this chapter. If the speculative nature of it is essential (as I think you have argued it is) then I am not opposed to this, but perhaps it would fir better in a section devoted to such speculative and scholarly work, like Volume 3. If you really disagree with that, then I might be persuaded to leave your draft as it is and in the same placement, but I would like to discuss first this possibility. Sorry if any of this has seemed contentious or bitter, I did not intend for that to be the case.
ArcusCalion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2018, 02:27 PM   #6
Findegil
King's Writer
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,417
Findegil is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
I didn't take your arguments contentious or bitter. And I agree that the chapter would fit in volume 3, but I still feel that we should keep it here. My reason for this is not that I think it would fit here better in style (in that I agree that volume 3 would be better for it), but that we need the information given here for a full picture of the history of the second age.

If we postpone this to volume 3 Glorfindel would be virtually non existant in the Second Age. And I see not other way inside our rulls to include him.

Respectfully
Findegil
Findegil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2018, 06:34 PM   #7
ArcusCalion
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 369
ArcusCalion has just left Hobbiton.
I do see this difficulty, and I am inclined to include it here for the same reasons, but the issue is the nature of the document. As it is an analytical text, by its nature it belongs in Volume 3, but due to its content, it would be better to include it here in Volume 2. It's quite a pickle.
ArcusCalion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2018, 02:12 AM   #8
gondowe
Wight
 
gondowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 179
gondowe has just left Hobbiton.
I dont remember if I had said this before, but have you considered to included in the Second age narrative but as a foot note? That way is how I managed. Ifit works with the project rules.
Greetings
gondowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2018, 08:25 AM   #9
Findegil
King's Writer
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,417
Findegil is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
The complete chapter as a footnote? And where do we place it? Do we have a mentioning of Glorfindel where we could make the reference?

I have some doubts. And as fare as I remember, such footnotes were avoided in the history of the project.

Respectfully
Findegil
Findegil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2018, 10:36 AM   #10
gondowe
Wight
 
gondowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 179
gondowe has just left Hobbiton.
The text of Glorfindel is not so great to be bad as a footnote. If is edited to be reduced as a coherent text of his late history can (or could) be introduced as a footnote of an inserted sentence in the main text telling that Glorfindel came...
Is a pity that I cannot have at hand my books and my text to be more precise. But I remember I had many doubts about manage Grolfindel matter and it was for me the best solution. Because I agree with Arcuscalion that is not a text for the narrative. And as a note inother part of the project (read my general notes or your volume 3) for me also doesnt work (in this particular case).
Greetings
gondowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2018, 12:26 PM   #11
ArcusCalion
Shade of Carn Dûm
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 369
ArcusCalion has just left Hobbiton.
I think this is the wrong way to go. It is a very important text, and would make an incredibly substantial footnote! I would say we must decide where to place it as its own text, although I do see the appeal of the footnote idea, as it solves the two issues I mentioned before. However, it clearly has its own host of problems.
ArcusCalion is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:32 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.